PPP - Very Close Race in CO, unless Christie is Rep. Nominee
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 09:11:16 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls
  PPP - Very Close Race in CO, unless Christie is Rep. Nominee
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: PPP - Very Close Race in CO, unless Christie is Rep. Nominee  (Read 3145 times)
Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,577
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: July 29, 2014, 01:05:49 PM »

Hillary's current standing in Colorado is as follows:

Leading 41/40 over Jeb Bush
Leading 45/39 over Chris Christie
Leading 44/43 over Ted Cruz
Leading 45/43 over Mike Huckabee
Trailing 44/45 to Rand Paul

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2014/COMiscResults.pdf
Logged
JRP1994
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,045


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: July 29, 2014, 02:45:23 PM »

This must be the 10th poll in a roll to suggest that Colorado is looking at least R+5 compared to the national average.
Logged
Never
Never Convinced
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,623
Political Matrix
E: 4.65, S: 3.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: July 29, 2014, 02:51:15 PM »

This must be the 10th poll in a roll to suggest that Colorado is looking at least R+5 compared to the national average.

That would be something considering the state's recent trends. I hope what we're seeing in the polls actually holds up in 2016. Even if Republicans ultimately lose the Colorado it would be good to see a swing state like it shifting in the party's direction compared to 2012.
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: July 29, 2014, 02:56:24 PM »

This must be the 10th poll in a roll to suggest that Colorado is looking at least R+5 compared to the national average.

That would be something considering the state's recent trends. I hope what we're seeing in the polls actually holds up in 2016. Even if Republicans ultimately lose the Colorado it would be good to see a swing state like it shifting in the party's direction compared to 2012.

The ultimate question is how it would be happening. I think a lot of growth of Colorado Springs's Fundamentalist population shifted it right in the late 90s. I'm not so sure how it could happen again demographically. I'm thinking that the libertarians (which Democrats spoiled the good will of the last 1 year or so) and the miners are just becoming more organized if they start doing better.


Logged
Never
Never Convinced
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,623
Political Matrix
E: 4.65, S: 3.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: July 29, 2014, 03:02:20 PM »

This must be the 10th poll in a roll to suggest that Colorado is looking at least R+5 compared to the national average.

That would be something considering the state's recent trends. I hope what we're seeing in the polls actually holds up in 2016. Even if Republicans ultimately lose the Colorado it would be good to see a swing state like it shifting in the party's direction compared to 2012.

The ultimate question is how it would be happening. I think a lot of growth of Colorado Springs's Fundamentalist population shifted it right in the late 90s. I'm not so sure how it could happen again demographically. I'm thinking that the libertarians (which Democrats spoiled the good will of the last 1 year or so) and the miners are just becoming more organized if they start doing better.




It probably would be the libertarian element of Colorado that comprises the bulk of the shift. I wouldn't imagine it being the Religious Right (or minorities for that matter), considering how poorly the Republican candidates are doing against Clinton in the South and other diverse states.
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: July 29, 2014, 03:11:25 PM »
« Edited: July 29, 2014, 03:13:53 PM by MooMooMoo »

This must be the 10th poll in a roll to suggest that Colorado is looking at least R+5 compared to the national average.

That would be something considering the state's recent trends. I hope what we're seeing in the polls actually holds up in 2016. Even if Republicans ultimately lose the Colorado it would be good to see a swing state like it shifting in the party's direction compared to 2012.

The ultimate question is how it would be happening. I think a lot of growth of Colorado Springs's Fundamentalist population shifted it right in the late 90s. I'm not so sure how it could happen again demographically. I'm thinking that the libertarians (which Democrats spoiled the good will of the last 1 year or so) and the miners are just becoming more organized if they start doing better.




It probably would be the libertarian element of Colorado that comprises the bulk of the shift. I wouldn't imagine it being the Religious Right (or minorities for that matter), considering how poorly the Republican candidates are doing against Clinton in the South and other diverse states.

I imagine if Clinton or the Democrats lose, especially to someone who isn't Rand Paul, this region will probably swing back if it ultimately swings at all. I was pretty sure in 2010 that Republicans were going to start doing very well out here. I imagine that Colorado would be as red as Nebraska or Missouri is now if they adopted a "50 states" approach to civil liberties. Else, it could be that the median voter will be pitting gun control advocates against the religious right for decades to come.  

Clinton does seem to depolarize on civil liberties but as we get closer, they may become front in center and she may lose the election the way Gore did by doing poorly out west and not quite well enough to carry a single southern state or she could do very well by cobbling up a large coalition.
Logged
Prince of Salem
JoMCaR
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,639
Peru


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: July 29, 2014, 03:13:00 PM »


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykpjFjsEdl4
Logged
Matty
boshembechle
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,901


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: July 29, 2014, 03:46:53 PM »

Why is Clinton "relatively weak" in Colorado?
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: July 29, 2014, 04:21:58 PM »

Why is Clinton "relatively weak" in Colorado?

One liberal I talked to said they just don't like dynasties. Another was probably the gun control legislation of the 90s.

Or it could be Democrats are under polled this early. Obama was in the 30s in Colorado by the end of 2009. He still won the state by 5.
Logged
Obama-Biden Democrat
Zyzz
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,828


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: July 29, 2014, 04:53:04 PM »

Colorado is a creative class 'latte liberal' state, Hillary wont have the same appeal as Obama did among those wealthy suburban socially moderate suburbanites like Obama did. Hillary is a very strong candidate, but she certainly has her weaknesses in certain states.

I would also expect her to run poorly compared to the national average in states like Virginia (Nova) , Oregon and Washington. Obama was a perfect fit for those states, like Hillary seems to be in the upper south.
Logged
Frozen Sky Ever Why
ShadowOfTheWave
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,610
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: July 29, 2014, 05:02:24 PM »

The key difference being that the Latte states are winnable, the upper south is not. 45% in TN instead of 39% is still losing.
Logged
Obama-Biden Democrat
Zyzz
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,828


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: July 29, 2014, 06:19:15 PM »

The key difference being that the Latte states are winnable, the upper south is not. 45% in TN instead of 39% is still losing.

True, but there will be a huge trend towards Hillary regardless of how much she wins the various states by. There will be a huge trend towards her from Missouri to Louisiana and Oklahoma to West Virginia and Western PA. Obama was radioactive in places like that.
Logged
Mr. Morden
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,073
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: July 29, 2014, 08:56:51 PM »

Bush vs. Clinton by race:
Hispanic: Clinton +23
white: Bush +5
other: Clinton +30

Paul vs. Clinton by race:
Hispanic: Clinton +35
white: Paul +9
other: Clinton +15

Bush vs. Clinton by age:
18-29: Clinton +26
30-45: Bush +5
46-65: Bush +2
65+: Bush +4

Paul vs. Clinton by age:
18-29: Paul +1
30-45: Paul +6
46-65: Clinton +2
65+: Paul +2
Logged
GaussLaw
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,279
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: July 29, 2014, 09:03:06 PM »

The key difference being that the Latte states are winnable, the upper south is not. 45% in TN instead of 39% is still losing.

Hillary can win MO though in a decent D year whereas Obama needed an utter wave.  Same with AZ and AR.  

Honestly, I think the GOP winning CO and the Dems winning Arkansas and Missouri would be great for our national environment.......I would love to see liberals stop talking about how Republicans are just uneducated rednecks and Republicans talking about "real America" and how they win in "God's country" or something like that.  Shifting the electoral map like that would do a lot to defuse this pesky rhetoric.
Logged
Dixie Reborn
BeyondTruthAndIdeals
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 817
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: July 29, 2014, 09:14:59 PM »

Again, it's hard to see Hillary lose Colorado by one point, yet win Florida by 20.
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: July 29, 2014, 11:10:38 PM »

The key difference being that the Latte states are winnable, the upper south is not. 45% in TN instead of 39% is still losing.

Hillary can win MO though in a decent D year whereas Obama needed an utter wave.  Same with AZ and AR.  

Honestly, I think the GOP winning CO and the Dems winning Arkansas and Missouri would be great for our national environment.......I would love to see liberals stop talking about how Republicans are just uneducated rednecks and Republicans talking about "real America" and how they win in "God's country" or something like that.  Shifting the electoral map like that would do a lot to defuse this pesky rhetoric.

A situation where social issues are deemphasized would be a positive development.
Logged
Skill and Chance
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,522
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: July 29, 2014, 11:43:56 PM »

Colorado is a creative class 'latte liberal' state, Hillary wont have the same appeal as Obama did among those wealthy suburban socially moderate suburbanites like Obama did. Hillary is a very strong candidate, but she certainly has her weaknesses in certain states.

I would also expect her to run poorly compared to the national average in states like Virginia (Nova) , Oregon and Washington. Obama was a perfect fit for those states, like Hillary seems to be in the upper south.

It might run deeper than this.  Obama in 2012 lagged Kerry 2004 in many of the Western ski counties.  Also, in VA/OR Hillary has been polling even with or better than Obama generally.  The problem states for Hillary seem to be CO/IA/NH.  Libertarian/dove issues?
Logged
DS0816
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,107
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: July 31, 2014, 05:13:59 AM »

This must be the 10th poll in a roll to suggest that Colorado is looking at least R+5 compared to the national average.

Which is enough reason to dismiss this "suggestion."
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: July 31, 2014, 11:03:39 AM »

Colorado is a creative class 'latte liberal' state, Hillary wont have the same appeal as Obama did among those wealthy suburban socially moderate suburbanites like Obama did. Hillary is a very strong candidate, but she certainly has her weaknesses in certain states.

I would also expect her to run poorly compared to the national average in states like Virginia (Nova) , Oregon and Washington. Obama was a perfect fit for those states, like Hillary seems to be in the upper south.

It might run deeper than this.  Obama in 2012 lagged Kerry 2004 in many of the Western ski counties.  Also, in VA/OR Hillary has been polling even with or better than Obama generally.  The problem states for Hillary seem to be CO/IA/NH.  Libertarian/dove issues?

I think the reason Obama didn't do too well in the mountains was because the coal industry really pushed back in 2012.

I think name recognition will change a lot of races that seem impossible at this point. 
Logged
Fuzzy Stands With His Friend, Chairman Sanchez
Fuzzy Bear
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,500
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: August 02, 2014, 02:12:58 PM »

Again, it's hard to see Hillary lose Colorado by one point, yet win Florida by 20.

FL is demographically changing faster than CO, and most of those changes favor Democrats on balance.
Logged
Frozen Sky Ever Why
ShadowOfTheWave
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,610
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: August 02, 2014, 02:16:49 PM »

Why does everyone keeping bringing up that 20% margin? Are they assuming the undecideds in that poll will decide not to vote?
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: August 02, 2014, 04:42:19 PM »

No Democratic nominee for President has won Florida by a 10% margin in a binary choice since FDR in 1944. Not even LBJ in 1964.
Logged
Frozen Sky Ever Why
ShadowOfTheWave
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,610
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: August 02, 2014, 05:33:51 PM »

No Democratic nominee for President has won Florida by a 10% margin in a binary choice since FDR in 1944. Not even LBJ in 1964.

But the actual numbers were 54-33. Surely the vast majority of those undecideds would go to Christie in the end.
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: August 02, 2014, 07:52:39 PM »

No Democratic nominee for President has won Florida by a 10% margin in a binary choice since FDR in 1944. Not even LBJ in 1964.

But the actual numbers were 54-33. Surely the vast majority of those undecideds would go to Christie in the end.

In 2008, there was a poll that had Obama down by 20 in Florida, or at least North Carolina as soon as Palin was selected.

I think this time next year would be a good time to start looking at the relative bases and problems of the candidates.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.051 seconds with 14 queries.